Are bacon-cheeseburgers next? As a practical matter, no. Sodas are an easy target because there is nothing, nothing, nutritionally redeeming about them. But might there come a day when the New York City Department of Health mandates that burgers be limited to, say, four ounces? Indeed there might. And why not? Eight- and ten-ounce burgers are sick things.

We have a health crisis in this country. A country with half of its adults living in a condition of obesity is a sick country, quite literally, spending probably not billions but trillions on the associated illnesses and maladies. Under such conditions, the state has every right to take action on behalf of the common good. We once had an epidemic of traffic deaths. We didn’t ban driving. But we came up with a device that is a minor inconvenience at most. And so seatbelts became mandatory, and now the epidemic has receded. A few people still foolishly oppose seatbelts. But most of us accept them and understand that whatever little dollop of our freedom is taken away as we latch up is more than countervailed by the practical upside.

One day, if the country comes to its senses, we’ll reverse the obesity trend and, just as we now chuckle at the prevalence of smoking on Mad Men, we’ll say, “Can you believe people used to peddle this treacle in 64-ounce doses?” We will not only have done something about obesity. We’ll have won an important victory over Libertarianism Gone Wild, a far bigger threat to society than even Sunkist Orange.

***

The proposed ban may not be the best way of dealing with the obesity problem, or the role that sugared drinks play in it. It may not work at all — actually, given the rather large loopholes it will contain, it may backfire. But at some point someone had to step in and do something, and for a number of reasons, that someone basically had to be Mike Bloomberg…

The man deserves the reputation for incorrigible nannyism that he’s gotten during his time in office. His administration has been marked by one crusade after another: against smoking, against salt, against trans fats, against soda. But those crusades have, for the most part—the one against salt is the notable exception—been remarkably successful. The trans-fat ban was a model for the nation. The anti-smoking campaign, which made cigarettes more expensive, more inconvenient, and more stigmatized, has been incredibly successful—it may be the most successful anti-drug program in history…

The federal government would never be able to do anything like this right now, not in this political climate, and not with this Congress. The state legislature tried and failed. But Bloomberg can. Worst-case scenario, it’s a miserable failure, it tarnishes his legacy, and his successor overturns it on day one in office. But the best-case scenario isn’t that difficult to achieve: the ban doesn’t have to work that well, or really at all, to be a success. Even if the ban does nothing but shift the discussion about what the government can do to protect the health of its citizens in his favor, Nanny Bloomberg will have won, and we’ll be better off for it.

***

Here’s what’s really going to happen…

The price of a 16 oz cup will increase to somewhere between the current 16 oz price and the gigantic size (whatever that may be at a given restaurant).

Some people who used to drink what Bloomberg considers to be an appropriate amount of soda will simply stop buying soda when the price goes up; some will consume exactly the same amount of soda as before, but pay more for that choice; and some will drink more soda, because they feel they’ve paid for it and need to derive more value from their free refill purchase. If you view increased soda consumption as “bad,” then this is a net “bad” for the population of people Bloomberg believes consume soda in appropriate amounts. It does the opposite for this group by encouraging some percentage of those making “healthy” choices to consume more soda.

Now for the population that Bloomberg is trying to affect: Those who drink massive quantities of soda will still be able to do so via free refills by making more trips to the soda fountain. It will just cost them less to do so.

[T]his ban isn’t targeted at those responsible for government healthcare spending. It will be in place at every restaurant, deli, sporting event, and food cart. This will affect every person interested in purchasing soda who resides in — or for that matter, even visits — New York City, whether the city pays for their healthcare or not. What does a tourist from Canada or Virginia have to do with New York’s obesity costs? This law will only heighten animosity toward government’s vital role in promoting healthier lifestyle habits…

His administration was able to force eateries to put calorie counts on menus. While the measure was approved — it hasn’t proven effective. Preliminary research has been inconclusive and unable to show that consumers are making healthier choices as a result; and even worse, according to one study, consumers purchased 106 more calories when they were listed on menus…

Furthermore, Mr. Bloomberg hasn’t produced any research showing the majority of soda consumed is done so outside the home, where the ban actually is in place. There’s a reason for that — he can’t. More than half of one’s soda consumption occurs at home, according to the CDC. Soda consumed at home is more likely to be purchased from grocery stores and bodegas (corner stores), which will be exempt from the soda ban. So how much of an impact can this soda ban really have on an individual’s daily caloric intake or overall health? Not much.

***

But there’s an even darker side to bans. They have a socio-economic impact, by which I mean, some people are more affected by bans than others. Bans widen the divide between the rich, who can find a way around them, and the poor, who perhaps cannot. And while Bloomberg’s tactics are obviously part of what people dub a “nanny state” ideology, in which he’s telling us what to do, he’s telling some people what to do more than others. Rich people, among whom one is billionaire Bloomberg himself, are not going to be impacted by a soda ban the same way poor New Yorkers are — if the wealthy prefer huge bottles of soda, they’ll have no trouble continuing to find them. And the problem that Bloomberg’s trying to “fix” — obesity — is, according to the stats and research, a “poor” problem, not a rich one. This makes Bloomberg’s move seem ever the more paternalistic. A class of people whom he’s judged unable to make the proper decision for themselves is now being told what to do, by someone who knows better…

But none of these bans really serve to get to the point, anyway. If we’re to talk of equity, we should also ask why healthy, particularly organic, fresh food costs more than packaged, processed food, why lean turkey or chicken is priced higher than the bad, fatty cuts, or why in some cases the cost of milk is greater than the cost of soda. It seems that a better way to promote health to all would by making it easier for everyone to get healthy, good food—not by “outlawing” the bad stuff, or soda, which beverage industry folks say isn’t the cause of the problem in the first place, citing reports that say sugared drink consumption has decreased while our obesity issues keep increasing.

***

If you tax one sugared product, you make the targeted products less attractive — but you also make any number of other sugared products relatively more attractive. If theaters are limited on the size drinks they can sell, they can offer free refills, and throw in “free” candy bars with their large-soda purchases, or offer a buy-one-get-one-free deal. With narrowly targeted bans, people can still get their sugar fixes from a multitude of other venues and sources that are not subject to bans (grocery and convenience stores are not covered). Twinkies, anyone?…

Second, in the case of tobacco bans and taxes, the bans and taxes could be narrowly targeted and were, and are, endured solely by the offending parties—smokers. Soda (and other fat) bans and taxes will certainly hit the supposed offending parties, but they will also be paid by people who work hard–and suffer real costs—to remain trim. They can also have unintended and unanticipated consequences. Ironically, as research has shown, higher cigarette taxes have contributed to the country’s weight gain by causing reformed smokers and never-smokers to eat more than they otherwise would have.

Instead of narrowly focused or blanket bans and taxes on identified categories of sugared and fatty foods, a far more direct and effective policy course would simply be to hold heavy people fully responsible for the costs of their excess poundage. These weight-related costs show up in lost productivity and higher medical costs and in their impositions on others’ space in the tight quarters of planes and buses. Having heavy people bear the full costs of their excess poundage (for example, through lower wages and higher insurance premiums and air fares) will surely be far more freedom preserving and effective in curbing obesity than soda bans and taxes.

***

“Hey look, I gave up pop for Lent three years ago,” [Rep. Paul] Ryan said. “I haven’t had one since. but that’s up to you, do what you want with your life. We believe in economic freedom, we believe in individual freedom, and so we don’t want a nanny state. We don’t want a government micromanaging your life.

“And we don’t want a government micromanaging our financial services sector, our energy sector, our healthcare sector because what you end up with that is, you end up with crony capitalism, you end up with corporate welfare. You end up with having big business and big government joined in a common cause to erect barriers to entry against entrepreneurs, against businesses, against families and that doesn’t work. If you want to see how that movie ends, look at Europe and we don’t want to go down that path.”

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Just before he dropped out entirely he said he felt like Ron Burgandy. I haven’t seen that movie but I’m pretty sure that isn’t a good thing. I hope he sticks around in a punditry role, he’s knowledgeable and funny.

The way I understand it, there was a screw-up getting his name on the ballot. It’s a district that he should probably win handily. I think he was planning a write-in.

RedCrow on June 3, 2012 at 1:07 AM

HuffPo has it near the top. I missed the May 29th headline post. I’m surprised this didn’t have more coverage at HA because of how popular he was with the RedEye folks. Maybe if AP had been around??? Though AP did do QOTD.

Cindy Munford on June 3, 2012 at 1:08 AM
r keller on June 3, 2012 at 1:10 AM

McCotter initially said he would conduct a write-in campaign, while seeking an investigation into happened with his petitions. But Saturday, he issued a statement saying he could not cooperate with the investigation, fulfill his current duties and run a write-in campaign, so he was ending his candidacy.

Just before he dropped out entirely he said he felt like Ron Burgandy. I haven’t seen that movie but I’m pretty sure that isn’t a good thing. I hope he sticks around in a punditry role, he’s knowledgeable and funny.

Cindy Munford on June 3, 2012 at 1:08 AM

I don’t remember much about Ron Burgundy. I’ve tried to block that movie out of my memory.

I agree it would be interesting to see him stick around in punditry, but I guess after 6 terms, he’s had his fair share of time in the House.

PS: Even though the DailyPaul people are ecstatic about this, the Bentivolio guy seems pretty solidly conservative on the surface – not completely Dennis Kucinich territory ;)

I think if the headline comments had generated more interest AP would have put in the blog but I have to tell you he did not get much understanding for this misstep. Most considered it a sign of poor management skills and not worthy of a member of Congress. I think that is a tad harsh because most of them aren’t worthy of Congress. Or at least what Congress should be.

Harsh, but he shoulda shoulda. I’ve noticed that in the GOP there are two groups. The really organized and those that don’t always take the rules seriously. I’m not trying to speak ill of McCotter, but maybe he became too comfortable. Let’s hope we get a good conservative to replace him.

Are there any historians here that know if totalitarian Marxist and fascist regimes or any kings or queen’s in history have ever tried to ban foods and quantities of food? Is this a new milestone or just another pretty typical of those types? I’m pretty confident that Romneycare was a new milestone, I’m not sure if any of them ever tried to force everybody to buy stuff from their cronies before simply as a cost of being allowed to live and retain freedom and liberty. In Massachusetts and soon in the entire country, if people don’t pay Obama’s and Romney’s cronies a large share of their income each month, they will bring the force of government down on their heads. Did Hitler or Mussolini ever go that far, I’m really curious. I suspect not, but if anybody has any examples I’d love to hear them.

I don’t know anything about Mr. Bentivolio. We have an interesting situation here in my neck of the woods. Apparently our area is going to get a new Representative. I was in Mica district and now I will be in a new one. I don’t even know how this is going to work.

I think that he is suggesting that it would be a full time job to investigate what went wrong in itself, not that he doesn’t want to cooperate. I would also guess that he took his reelection for granted and found out the hard way that his staff was phoning it in also.

Please don’t say he’ll have something to cry about after the election. I’m too pessimistic as it is.

RedCrow on June 3, 2012 at 1:54 AM

Dude cries when he hears an ice cream truck, it isn’t a sign of anything much like saying Bidden will be confused after the election- it is as natural to the order of things as the sun rising in the East, water being wet and trolls getting bogged down when they try to leave their talking points.

Now if someone were to say they say a movement in Jimmie Johnson’s hair or in old Botox/stone face Peloisi’s grizzled facade I might wonder as that would be a change in the natural state of things.

I honestly don’t know what it would take for some real push back from the public.

Cindy Munford on June 3, 2012 at 1:49 AM

An EMP that destroys all the televisions, perhaps.

Seriously though, I’m not sure how much the folks are to blame; corporate news propaganda is a powerful tool. The TEA party resisted the propaganda for a few years but even that would probably not have happened if Fox News hadn’t corrected the propaganda being spewed by the other corporate propaganda outlets. Then when Fox went wobbly during the debt ceiling fight and orders came down from above—and at the same time their was a concerted effort by the GOP establishment to subvert the tea party freshmen—even that came to an end. Now the tea party is just a get out the vote tool used by the establishment to fool low info voters who still think the tea party accomplished something important.

I’m not willing to write off the Tea Party so soon. They are still a relatively new thing and aren’t made up of people who like to go somewhere to protest. It may have been a flash in the pan but I’m going to wait and see.

Some people are born believing their purpose in life is to control other people. They are called liberals etc.

Unfortunately, too many other people wish to be controlled. They are called enablers -or sometimes, democrats or useful idiots.

Cuomo and Bloomberg are certain they have been gifted since birth, with the ability to belong to category one. Such folks are the antithesis of freedom. They will never stop a sugary drinks because, controlling other “lesser creatures” is the biggest addiction of all.

I’m not willing to write off the Tea Party so soon. They are still a relatively new thing and aren’t made up of people who like to go somewhere to protest. It may have been a flash in the pan but I’m going to wait and see.

Cindy Munford on June 3, 2012 at 2:24 AM

The tea party was about opposition to Obamacare, which is the same as Romneycare, and opposition to taxes, spending, inflation and bailouts, all of which Republicans, including the vast majority of the tea party freshmen, have voted in favor of.

The tea party voters may want change but they didn’t get what they wanted, and the theory failed. Replacing a huge swatch of the corrupt bastages all at the same time didn’t wipe the slate clean enough, it wasn’t long before they joined the establishment and are now part of the problem. There is no reason to believe doing the same thing over again will fare any better than the last time. We only got a few handfuls of keepers along with a bunch of new bosses, same as the old.

What we need to do is change the party at the top, where it counts, but instead the establishment is cracking the whip and holding a figurative gun to peoples heads forcing Romney on them whether they like it or not. Romney is the antithesis of the tea party—the tea party’s grim reaper—and the corrupt establishment is threatened by the tea party and is intentionally trying to destroy it. The threat is so great that they are cheating in the Republican caucuses to eliminate any challenge to their authority.

For example, in the LA state convention today the GOP had a uniformed goon squad violently remove duly elected Ron Paul delegates from the meeting, dislocating one guys hip, which may require surgery, and somebody sustained broken or at least sprained fingers, entirely unjustly.

This is very serious, un-American behavior. America really, seriously, is not the shining city on the hill anymore, and the GOP is part of the problem.

Parts of it were caught on video, please watch it. Even people who don’t support Ron Paul should condemn the behavior of the Republican Party establishment. Winners don’t have to cheat, they’re not winners, they’re losers. I don’t have any proof but I think they’re probably cheating a lot more than they’ve gotten caught and may be stealing the nomination.

The guy they goon squad arrested by dragging him across a bunch of chairs while they tried to wrestle the mic away from him is in the rules committee, duly nominated. What the heck are jackboots doing in a political meeting, anyway?

The Democrat Party may be Marxist, as Romney supporters like to point out, but the Republican Party is fascist.

Would any of you fine, upstanding Romney supporters like to explain to me why the GOP feels it’s necessary to use jackboot tactics in political events? Is that really what you want your party to represent, uniformed enforcers to impose your views even when you’re the minority? How is that any different than what the brownshirts did?

There’s a certain point at which Goodwins Law is no longer applicable, like when you have GOP brownshirts imposing your will at political events!

Also, are you guys aware that Romney is setting up “shadow party’s” in several states now? Romney is an official carpet bagger!

I remember in history class growing up we learned about carpet baggers and it was always noted who the carpet baggers were. Note any more, these days the news couldn’t care less, because Obamney is their man. They’ve made sure of it.

One day, if the country comes to its senses, we’ll reverse the obesity trend and, just as we now chuckle at the prevalence of smoking on Mad Men, we’ll say, “Can you believe people used to peddle this treacle in 64-ounce doses?” We will not only have done something about obesity. We’ll have won an important victory over Libertarianism Gone Wild, a far bigger threat to society than even Sunkist Orange.

Only someone completely clueless about what’s happening on the world stage would make a statement like this. It’s more likely the day will come when we’ll be saying things like, “Remember being able to go to the grocery store and buying as much sugar as we wanted, whenever we wanted?”

A note about the video in which the GOP goons dislocated that guys hip: at the end you’ll notice that the cop starting hinting that he was going to confiscate the guys phone “as evidence”, but didn’t.

Probably he didn’t because there was a chance there is another camera around. Unfortunately the guy filming it backed down and turned off the camera.

If GOP brownshirts try to confiscate a camera in the future Liberty supporters should make make sure to tell them that there are hidden cameras, even if it’s not true. Or at least it is a good tactic, I’m not sure about the legalities of it. How are they going to prove you’re lying? The only way they can even try to prove it is to start treating people like brownshirts would, searching their belongings and frisking them and stuff, and then it would just be more obvious what’s going on than it already is.

I just wish this stuff was in the corporate media where people would see it, but it’s not their job to report the real news anymore.

Fascism is the blending of corporations and government. It’s what happens when a people embrace cronyism instead of trying to minimize it. On the left you have a party that wants to turn people into wards of the state in exchange for votes, and on the other you have a party that wants to turn people into property of the corporations, or else the sky is going to fall, run for your lives!

Unfortunately the neo-cons seems to be in agreement with the Democrats on a lot of these things, they like the police-state too, perhaps with different, though overlapping motives. Mob rule on the left and Mob rule on the right, never mind the rights of dissenting minorities that just want the government and corporations to stay out of their personal lives.

I thought this kind of thinking was for the ‘chillens’?My question happens to be, how did we get here?

Proof certain that you’ll get more of it.

Handouts always yield ‘hands out’.

Get off your lame azz, fatty. Get a spark in your life. Perdition is nearly over.

Nanny (including Mittens) will never come close to understanding why this is wrong. So, wrong. I ask nothing. I am availed for what a person in need, needs. That’s how it is. It ends with that person back on their feet and in the world of pursuit (that of happiness).

That, to my humble understanding, is the premise.
Have just a little pride in yourselves. Wonderment for so many who refuse to play.
I am alive. That alone is reason enough to do something wonderful, everyday.

While you’re on your treadmill…
Just doesn’t make any good sense to me.

Good Lord, I think I may have finally said something cogent. Forgive me.

This is what happens when government pays for healthcare. It looks for ways to cut its costs.

It will only get worse. Just wait until you get SWAP and other programmes. You’ll love the food police coming into your homes and going through your cupboards telling you those boxes of biscuits and bags of crisps could result in you being denied medical treatment by the friendly folks at the local government health administration office.

Someday they’ll probably require green-refrigerators that monitor the contents, which will have benefits to make sure you never run out and everything is fresh, but the side effect is that the government will probably monitor your diet and punish people accordingly, or put a black mark in their file.

True and rightfully so, but would they today? I know that there are many WWII vets in Britain, who look around at the country, the layabouts, the bolters, the feral kids, and the overall dismal state of things, and wonder if their sacrifice was even worth it. I’m only 34 and I look at my generation and those younger and think, if it had been up to us, Hitler would have won and I would have needed a translator to translate this post from German into English.

The way I understand it, there was a screw-up getting his name on the ballot. It’s a district that he should probably win handily. I think he was planning a write-in.

RedCrow on June 3, 2012 at 1:07 AM

…McCotter is my congressman too!
I think the staff he has had the last few year were highly incompetent.
When Thaddeus first ran he was going door to door. He sat at my dining room table 15 miles from Livonia on a dead end road, talking politics with me and the bride.
Soon after the BP explosion, I needed information about the congressional hearings with Cowboy Ken Salazar…since a local troll who writes every two weeks to the local opinion section was outright lying…about JugEars firing his Harvard appointed head of the Minerals Management Agency…and employees getting FIRED by JugEars left and right.
Typical prog stuff…and the lies had gone on for months.
I called both McCotters office in Milford AND in Livonia two or three different times and left messages. No response. Than I called his D.C. number and left a message…none of these were topic related..I just stated I needed some information. I also emailed the D.C. office several times…Yes McCotter was running for Prez by then…but I knew then…he was in a whole lot of trouble in his next election. The first few years he was in office…I had called him to verify something and talked to a staff member…and he called back in no time!…now you get voice mails and no reponse at every venue you use?…It’s the staff! I love the guy…but he had no idea what his staff was doing…so if he would have made it to the Michigan primary…he would not have had my vote.

Bloomberg will go down in history as the first man in favor of smaller cup sizes.

I only drink maybe 6 sodas per year (Sprite), but when I get a cold drink from a convenience store or restaurant I always put more ice in my drink than beverage, so even if I purchase a 32 oz. drink I’m probably only getting around 16 ounces of beverage.

So Mr. Mayor, as a wise man once said, “…the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; its that they know so much that isn’t so.”

I did see it, and you are surely welcome. Sometimes I don’t know when to stop responding before the chit chat police start whining. I guess that would actually be a reason to drone on and on and on, annoying people can be fun.

those that like the 20oz bottle will instead buy 2 16 oz bottles and thus drink 32 oz instead of 20oz. the governmetn always screws things up. In fact just look back to the changes the government made to the USDA req over the last 40 years. the push to remove fat out of our diet which cauded food producers to replace the fat with sugar to bring back some taste. correlation to the explosion of obesity is there for all to see. The government under the guise of knowing what is best chaged our entire diet during the health fad of the 70′s and the end result is obesity epidemic.

It boils down to the anti-social, anti-human desire to invade and control, and hopefully hurt, peoples lives, They have to start somewhere & the business about soda is only an indicator, the takeover of our health care system and other encroachments are of the same type, the age old, primitive urge to aggression and power.
Obama is a hero to this type, and he and they are itching for a 2nd term, you might say to bring the curtain down.

We’ll have won an important victory over Libertarianism Gone Wild, a far bigger threat to society than even Sunkist Orange

Ah yes, that’s their real fear: that people will be able to make their own choices about how to live their lives, and will be responsible for the consequences of those choices. Oh, the horror! There is nothing more frightening to a liberal than liberty.

Just came back to the thread from last night, and Cindy, you are absolutely right about the fallout from the Global Warming implosion causing ordinary people to be forever skeptical of whatever comes out of the scientists’ mouths.

Also, I remembered I have this book, which I fished out of my attic. It was published in 1978, and it would be interesting to see an update, but what Dr. Reuben talked about then regarding processed foods, cholesterol, and vitamin supplements rings just as true today as it did when it was published. He’s also very skeptical of the FDA. Hmmm … wonder why?

Been thinking about Doomberg’s soda ban. I think I have a different slant on it. Rush keeps talking about how stupid it is, as people will simply buy two and pour them together. I think it is this, but for a very opposite and slightly brilliant reason – buying two = TWICE the taxes.

Think about that. This is probably the REAL purpose for this insanity.

I had only vaguely heard of Gary Taubes and his books “Good Calories, Bad Calories,” and “Why We Get Fat,” but then I found this series, all of which are worth watching if you have the time. One night at work, I just put on my headphones and started playing each of the six videos. Very illuminating.

Just as Cindy Munford mentioned upthread, the first crack in the wall was the Global Warming scam being exposed. It’s only a matter of time before a lot of other walls start coming down regarding the likely collusion and many decades worth of misinformation between the scientific/medical/drug/diet industries and the government.